Battery System and Method with Parameter Estimator

ABSTRACT

An electrochemical battery system in one embodiment includes at least one electrochemical cell, a first sensor configured to generate a current signal indicative of an amplitude of a current passing into or out of the at least one electrochemical cell, a second sensor configured to generate a voltage signal indicative of a voltage across the at least one electrochemical cell, a memory in which command instructions are stored, and a processor configured to execute the command instructions to obtain the current signal and the voltage signal, and to generate kinetic parameters for an equivalent circuit model of the at least one electrochemical cell by obtaining a derivative of an open cell voltage (U ocv ), obtaining an estimated nominal capacity (C nom ) of the at least one electrochemical cell, and estimating the kinetic parameters using a modified least-square algorithm with forgetting factor.

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/647,904 filed May 16, 2012, U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/647,926 filed May 16, 2012, and U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/647,948 filed May 16, 2012, the entirety of each of which is incorporated herein by reference. The principles of the present invention may be combined with features disclosed in those patent applications.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

This disclosure relates to batteries and more particularly to electrochemical batteries.

BACKGROUND

Batteries are a useful source of stored energy that can be incorporated into a number of systems. Rechargeable lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries are attractive energy storage systems for portable electronics and electric and hybrid-electric vehicles because of their high specific energy compared to other electrochemical energy storage devices. In particular, batteries with a form of lithium metal incorporated into the negative electrode afford exceptionally high specific energy (in Wh/kg) and energy density (in Wh/L) compared to batteries with conventional carbonaceous negative electrodes. Li-ion batteries also exhibit lack of hysteresis and low self-discharge currents. Accordingly, lithium-ion batteries are a promising option for incorporation into electric vehicles (EV), hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV).

One requirement for incorporation of batteries including Li-ion batteries into EV/HEV/PHEV systems is the ability to accurately compute the state of charge (SOC) and state of health (SOH) of the batteries in real time. SOC is a percentage which reflects the available energy in a cell compared to the available energy of the cell when fully charged. SOC is thus akin to the fuel gauge provided on fossil fuel based vehicles.

SOH is a general term which encompasses a variety of quantities and is in the form of a percentage which reflects the presently available energy and power in a cell assuming the cell to be fully charged compared to the available energy and power of the cell when fully charged at beginning of cell life. SOH is thus akin to the size of the fuel tank provided on fossil fuel based vehicles and the health of the engine to provide the power. Unlike the volume of a fuel tank and the power output of an engine, the SOH of a cell decreases over cell life as discussed more fully below.

Both SOC and SOH are needed to understand, for example, the available range of a vehicle using the cell and the available power. In order to provide SOH/SOC data, a battery management system (BMS) is incorporated into a vehicle to monitor battery parameters and predict SOH/SOC.

Various algorithms have been proposed for use in a BMS to maintain the battery system within safe operating parameters as well as to predict the actual available power in the battery system. One such approach based on an electrochemical paradigm is described by N. Chaturvedi, R. Klein, J. Christensen, J. Ahmed, and A. Kojic, “Algorithms for advanced battery-management systems,” IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 30(3), pp. 49-68, 2010. Generally, in order to accurately estimate the SOH of a system, the SOC of the system must be accurately known. Conversely, in order to accurately estimate the SOC of a system, the SOH of the system must be accurately known.

SOC estimation, even when an accurate SOH is available, is challenging since simple methods of predicting SOC, such as Coulomb Integration, suffer from increased errors over increased integration time. The increased errors result from biased current measurements or discretization errors as reported by S. Piller, M Perrin, and A. Jossen, “Methods for state-of-charge determination and their applications,” Journal of Power Sources, 96, pp. 113-120, 2001. Nonetheless, some approaches such as the approach described by U.S. Pat. No. 7,684,942 of Yun et al. use pure current integration to determine SOC and then derive SOH from the determined SOC.

Other approaches avoid exclusive reliance upon current integration by combining current integration with a form of SOC estimation to obtain an SOC as a weighted sum of both methods as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 7,352,156 of Ashizawa et al. In another approach reported by K. Ng, C. Moo, Y. Chen, and Y. Hsieh, “Enhanced coulomb counting method for estimating state-of-charge and state-of-health of lithium-ion batteries,” Journal of Applied Energy, 86, pp. 1506-1511, 2009, the result obtained from current integration is reset in accordance with an OCV/SOC look-up table.

All of the foregoing approaches, however, rely upon obtaining a dependable initial value for the cell SOC. If a dependable initial value for cell SOC is not available, the described methods fail. Unreliable SOC values are commonly encountered during drive cycles or when switching off current. For example, during driving cycles or when switching off current, the dynamics of the battery may not decay to zero or settle at a steady-state level at the precise moment that a measurement is obtained. Thus a calculation depending upon an observed voltage may be biased if the voltage is obtained during a transient.

Other approaches such as those described in U.S. Patent Publication No. 2010/0076705 of Liu et al., U.S. Pat. No. 7,615,967 of Cho et al., and U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0231166 of Melichar work only in discrete special cases and are not guaranteed to work robustly during normal operation of a battery. These approaches may further incur increased errors as a battery ages with use.

Many advanced BMSs incorporate various forms of a Kalman filter such as those reported by H. Dai, Z. Sun, and X. Wei, “Online SOC Estimation of High-power Lithium-ion Batteries used on HEV's,” Vehicular Electronics and Safety, ICVES, 2006, and J. Lee, O. Nam, and B. Cho, “Li-ion battery SOC estimation method based on the reduced order extended Kalman Filtering,” Journal of Power Sources, 174, pp. 9-15, 2007. BMSs incorporating Kalman filters, however, are based upon an assumption of known and time-invariant parameters incorporated into a battery model. In a real battery system the various parameters vary on both a long-term and short-term basis. For example, battery aging alters the capacity and internal resistance of the battery over the long term. Thus, the SOH of the battery changes over cell lifetime introducing errors into SOC calculations. Moreover, temperature and rate of current draw vary over the short term and both temperature and rate of current draw affect the SOC determination. Accordingly, while accurate knowledge of the present SOH of the battery is a prerequisite for accurate SOC determination in approaches incorporating Kalman filters, such information may not be readily available.

Accurate estimation of SOH is likewise challenging. A good estimator has to be able to track battery model parameters on a short time scale to account for the parameters' dependence or rate of current draw, SOC, and temperature, and also on a long time scale to account for changing health of the battery. Estimators which operate when the battery is placed off-line have been proposed. Placing a battery offline in order to determine remaining driving range, however, is typically not possible. Moreover, this approach is not recursive resulting in increased computational expense. Thus, such off-line approaches are of limited value in providing near real-time estimation which is needed during operation of a vehicle.

Additionally, approaches which require stable input parameters, which may be available when a system is offline, cannot provide accurate estimates when presented with disturbances in the measured battery parameter signals like voltage and current noise, gain errors and/or measurement bias. Moreover, since the open circuit voltage (OCV) of most batteries is nonlinear, a direct application of standard parameter estimation theory which is directed to estimating a constant value is not possible. Accordingly, accurate knowledge of the present SOC of the battery is a prerequisite for accurate SOH determination. U.S. Pat. No. 7,352,156 of Ashizawa et al. addresses this issue by assuming a linearized model with an initially known OCV. As the actual SOC diverges from the assumed linear model, however, estimation errors are incurred and can eventually result in divergence of the estimator. Thus, known systems rely on the actual SOC or incorporate excess robustness into the SOH estimation to allow for SOC errors.

Accordingly, accurately estimating SOH and SOC presents a circular problem in known systems with accurate estimation of one parameter depending upon accurate foreknowledge of the other of the two parameters. Some attempts have been made to solve the circular problem by performing a combined estimation of both parameters. Such approaches have been reported by G. Plett, “Extended Kalman Filtering for battery management systems of LiPB-based HEV battery packs Part3. State and parameter estimation,” Journal of Power Sources, 134, pp. 277-292, 2004, and M. Roscher and D. Sauer, “Dynamic electric behavior and open-circuit-voltage modeling of LiFePO4-based lithium ion secondary batteries,” Journal of Power Sources, 196, pp. 331-336, 2011. These approaches, however, are computationally expensive.

An alternative approach to solving the circular SOH/SOC problem is to incorporate extended or unscented Kalman filters as reported by G. Plett, “Sigma-point Kalman Filtering for battery management systems of LiPB-based HEV battery packs. Part 2: Simultaneous state and parameter estimation,” Journal of Power sources, 161, pp. 1369-1384, 2006. This approach, however, is also computationally expensive.

What is needed therefore is a battery system incorporating a BMS with SOH estimation which converges even for initially inaccurate SOC parameters. A system which is much more robust than known approaches given initial inaccuracies would be beneficial. A system which accurately estimates SOH without relying upon initial system assumptions regarding model noise would be further advantageous.

SUMMARY

An electrochemical battery system in one embodiment includes at least one electrochemical cell, a first sensor configured to generate a current signal indicative of an amplitude of a current passing into or out of the at least one electrochemical cell, a second sensor configured to generate a voltage signal indicative of a voltage across the at least one electrochemical cell, a memory in which command instructions are stored, and a processor configured to execute the command instructions to obtain the current signal and the voltage signal, and to generate kinetic parameters for an equivalent circuit model of the at least one electrochemical cell by obtaining a derivative of an open cell voltage (U_(ocv)) with respect to SOC, obtaining an estimated nominal capacity (C_(nom)) of the at least one electrochemical cell, and estimating the kinetic parameters using a modified least-square algorithm with forgetting factor.

In accordance with another embodiment, a method of determining kinetic parameters for an equivalent circuit model of at least one electrochemical cell includes obtaining a derivative of an open cell voltage (U_(ocv)) with respect to SOC, obtaining an estimated nominal capacity (C_(nom)) of the at least one electrochemical cell, and estimating the kinetic parameters using a modified least-square algorithm with forgetting factor.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 depicts a schematic of a battery system including a lithium-ion cell, a processor, and a memory with command instructions which, when executed by the processor, run a parameter estimator which generates kinetic parameters of a model of the battery system;

FIG. 2 depicts a schematic of an equivalent circuit of the battery system of FIG. 1 including static parameters (open cell voltage) and kinetic parameters, wherein the kinetic parameters include an effective resistance, and a parallel circuit in series with the effective resistance, the parallel circuit including a resistance in parallel with a capacitance;

FIG. 3 depicts a schematic of a model executed by the processor of FIG. 1 including an estimator which generates the kinetic parameters of FIG. 2 based upon a sensed voltage and sensed current of the battery system of FIG. 1, and based upon a received SOC estimate from an observer; and

FIG. 4 depicts the results of a validation process in which a lithium-ion cell is discharged and the model of FIG. 3 is used to generate kinetic parameters.

DESCRIPTION

For the purposes of promoting an understanding of the principles of the disclosure, reference will now be made to the embodiments illustrated in the drawings and described in the following written specification. It is understood that no limitation to the scope of the disclosure is thereby intended. It is further understood that the present disclosure includes any alterations and modifications to the illustrated embodiments and includes further applications of the principles of the disclosure as would normally occur to one skilled in the art to which this disclosure pertains.

FIG. 1 depicts an electrochemical battery system 100 including an electrochemical cell in the form of Li-ion cell 102, a memory 104, and a processor 106. Various command instructions, discussed in further detail below, are programmed into the memory 104. The processor 106 is operable to execute the command instructions programmed into the memory 104.

The Li-ion cell 102 includes a negative electrode 108, a positive electrode 110, and a separator region 112 between the negative electrode 108 and the positive electrode 110. The negative electrode 108 includes active materials 116 into which lithium can be inserted, inert materials 118, electrolyte 120 and a current collector 122.

The negative electrode 108 may be provided in various alternative forms. The negative electrode 108 may incorporate dense Li metal or a conventional porous composite electrode (e.g., graphite particles mixed with binder). Incorporation of Li metal is desired since the Li metal affords a higher specific energy than graphite.

The separator region 112 includes an electrolyte with a lithium cation and serves as a physical and electrical barrier between the negative electrode 108 and the positive electrode 110 so that the electrodes are not electronically connected within the cell 102 while allowing transfer of lithium ions between the negative electrode 108 and the positive electrode 110.

The positive electrode 110 includes active material 126 into which lithium can be inserted, a conducting material 128, fluid 130, and a current collector 132. The active material 126 includes a form of sulfur and may be entirely sulfur. The conducting material 128 conducts both electrons and lithium ions and is well connected to the separator 112, the active material 126, and the collector 132. In alternative embodiments, separate material may be provided to provide the electrical and lithium ion conduction. The fluid 130, which may be a liquid or a gas, is relatively inert with respect to the other components of the positive electrode 110. Gas which may be used includes argon or nitrogen. The fluid 130 fills the interstitial spaces between the active material 126 and the conducting material 128.

The lithium-ion cell 102 operates in a manner similar to the lithium-ion battery cell disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 7,726,975, which issued Jun. 1, 2010, the contents of which are herein incorporated in their entirety by reference. In other embodiments, other battery chemistries are used in the cell 102. In general, electrons are generated at the negative electrode 108 during discharging and an equal amount of electrons are consumed at the positive electrode 110 as lithium and electrons move in the direction of the arrow 134 of FIG. 1.

In the ideal discharging of the cell 102, the electrons are generated at the negative electrode 108 because there is extraction via oxidation of lithium ions from the active material 116 of the negative electrode 108, and the electrons are consumed at the positive electrode 110 because there is reduction of lithium ions into the active material 126 of the positive electrode 110. During discharging, the reactions are reversed, with lithium and electrons moving in the direction of the arrow 136. While only one cell 102 is shown in the system 100, the system 100 may include more than one cell 102.

During operation of the cell 102, cell voltage is monitored using a voltage meter 138 and an amp meter 140 monitors current flow into and out of the cell 102. Signals from the voltage meter 138 and the amp meter 140 are provided to the processor 106 which uses the signals to estimate the SOH and, in this embodiment, SOC of the cell 102. In general, the processor 106 uses a state space equation which models the cell 102 to estimate SOH and SOC. By way of background, a simple equivalent circuit for a known cell is depicted in FIG. 2. In FIG. 2, open cell voltage (OCV), nominal capacity (C_(nom)), rest voltage, etc., are modeled as static parameters 150. The internal resistance (R_(e)) 152 and a parallel circuit 154 including a resistor (R₁) 156 and a capacitor (C₁) 158 represent kinetic parameters.

State space equations for the equivalent circuit of FIG. 2 can be written, in continuous time, as the following:

${\begin{pmatrix} {\overset{.}{x}}_{1} \\ {\overset{.}{x}}_{2} \end{pmatrix} = {{\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & {{- 1}/\left( {R_{1}C_{1}} \right)} \end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix} x_{1} \\ x_{2} \end{pmatrix}} + {\begin{pmatrix} {{- 1}/C_{nom}} \\ {{1/R_{1}}C_{1}} \end{pmatrix}u}}},{and}$ ${y = {{U_{O\; C\; V}\left( x_{1} \right)} + {\begin{pmatrix} 0 & {- R_{1}} \end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix} x_{1} \\ x_{2} \end{pmatrix}} + {\left( {- R_{e}} \right)u}}},$

wherein

“u” is the current applied to the battery,

“y” is the measured cell voltage,

“x₁” is the cell SOC,

“x₂” is the current (i₁) through the impedance (R₁) 156,

“U_(OCV)” is the open circuit voltage of the cell, and

“C_(nom)” is the nominal capacity of the cell associated with the U_(OCV).

In the foregoing state equations, the SOH battery parameters R_(e), R₁, and C₁, in general terms, are functions of the cell SOC, cell current, and cell temperature. Thus, the values for those parameters can vary over time (kinetic parameters). Consequently, the foregoing state equations are nonlinear. Moreover, since the second state space equation above incorporates the term “U_(OCV)(•)” as a function of x₁, it is inherently nonlinear, even in situations with otherwise constant parameters. Additionally, the first state space equation above reveals that the system dynamics are Lyapunov stable, not asymptotically stable. Accordingly, approaches which attempt to predict SOH or SOC using linear systems are inherently inaccurate.

In contrast with prior systems, the system 100 has a model 160 stored within the memory 104 which is executed by the processor 106 (see FIG. 1). The model 160 is schematically depicted in FIG. 3. The model 160 running within the processor 106 receives input from the voltage meter 138 and the amp meter 140. Signals indicative of the voltage of the cell 102 are provided to a parameter estimator 162 and, in this embodiment, a reduced modified observer 164. The parameters (θ) estimated by the parameter estimator 162 are also provided as an input to the reduced modified observer 164 while the output (SOC) of the reduced modified observer 164 is provided as an input to the parameter estimator 162. The output parameters in this embodiment represent the values for the kinetic parameters R_(e) 152, R₁ 156, and C₁ 158 of FIG. 2.

Simply incorporating an adaptive observer does not necessarily result in an algorithm which converges, however, because small initial errors in the SOC estimate provided to the parameter estimator can result in increasingly large SOH estimations. This problem may be exacerbated by unknown offsets in current and noise in current and voltage measurements.

In order to ensure convergence, the parameter estimator 162 estimates the kinetic parameters based upon voltage and current measurements of the cell 102 while applying a modified least squares algorithm with forgetting factor to data used in forming the estimation. In other words, while historical data are used in estimating present parameters, the older data are given exponentially less weight in the estimation.

Additionally, rather than directly using an OCV reading as an indication of SOC, the parameter estimator 162 uses a form of a derivative with respect to SOC of the OCV signal. Using a derivative of the OCV reduces the impact of an inaccurate SOC input since the OCV for the cell 102 exhibits a nearly constant slope over a wide range of SOC. Therefore, the impact of initial SOC errors on the accuracy of the estimation is reduced.

The algorithm for the parameter estimator 162 in one embodiment is derived from the above described state equations by defining a parametric form “

” in the following manner:

$z = {\frac{s^{2}y}{} + \frac{s\; L\left\{ {{U_{O\; C\; V}^{\prime}\left( {\hat{x}}_{1} \right)}\frac{u}{C_{nom}}} \right\}}{}}$

wherein

“

(•)” represents a Laplacé transform

“s” represents a complex number with real numbers σ and ω,

“

” represents a higher order filter with a cut-off frequency that depends upon the expected drive cycle (about 0.1 Hz in one embodiment), such as a 4^(th) order Butterworth filter with a cut-off frequency of 0.1 rad/s, and

“{circumflex over (x)}₁” is an estimate of the SOC from the observer 164.

Next, a vector (Φ) is defined in the following manner:

$\Phi = {\begin{bmatrix} \Phi_{1} \\ \Phi_{2} \\ \Phi_{3} \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} \frac{su}{} \\ \frac{s^{2}u}{} \\ {\frac{sy}{} + \frac{s\; \mathcal{L}\left\{ {{U_{O\; C\; V}^{\prime}\left( {\hat{x}}_{1} \right)}\frac{u}{C_{nom}}} \right\}}{}} \end{bmatrix}}$

Converting the foregoing into parametric form results in the following:

z=Φ ^(T)θ+

(U _(OCV)(x ₁(0)),t)

wherein

“Φ^(T)” is a transpose of the matrixΦ,

:

×

⁺→

is a class

function,

$\Theta = {\begin{bmatrix} \Theta_{1} \\ \Theta_{2} \\ \Theta_{3} \end{bmatrix} \in {\mathbb{R}}^{3}}$

is a non-linear transformation of the physical parameters (R_(e), R₁, C₁)∈

³, and the inverse transform is defined as:

$\begin{bmatrix} R_{e} \\ R_{1} \\ C_{1} \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} {- \Theta_{2}} \\ \frac{\Theta_{1} + {\Theta_{2}\Theta_{3}}}{\Theta_{3}} \\ \frac{1}{\Theta_{1} + {\Theta_{2}\Theta_{3}}} \end{bmatrix}$

In the equation above for the parametric form of “

”, the last term accounts for effects resulting from an unknown state of charge. For an asymptotically stable filter design, however, the last two terms in the equation for the parametric form of “

” vanish asymptotically. Accordingly, by defining {circumflex over (Θ)}(t) to be an estimate of the parameters at time “t”, the parameter estimator law is given by:

{circumflex over ({dot over (Θ)}(t)=ε(t)P(t)Φ(t)

ε(t)=z(t)−Φ^(T)(t){circumflex over (Θ)}(t)

{dot over (P)}(t)=βP(t)−P(t)Φ(t)Φ(t)^(T) P(t)

wherein

“ε” is the output error,

“P” is a covariance matrix,

the matrix P∈

^(3×3) is initialized as a positive definitive matrix P_(o), and

the initial parameters estimate {circumflex over (Θ)}(0)=Θ₀ is used as an initial value for the parameters (Θ).

In the foregoing parameter algorithm, values for C_(nom) and an estimate for the SOC ({circumflex over (x)}{circumflex over (x₁)}) are needed. The SOC estimate can be provided in various embodiments by any desired SOC estimator. The value of C_(nom) may be provided in any desired manner as well, although the model 160 in this embodiment includes an algorithm that provides a C_(nom) without the need for SOC or SOH inputs as described more fully below.

In this embodiment, the system 100 includes a reduced observer 164 which uses input from the parameter estimator 162 to generate an estimated SOC. Given the foregoing parameter estimator equations, the SOC for the cell 102 is defined by the following equation in the reduced observer 164:

$\overset{.}{\hat{x_{1}}} = {{- \frac{u}{C_{nom}}} + {L\begin{pmatrix} {\frac{y}{} - \frac{U_{O\; C\; V}\left( {\hat{x}}_{1} \right)}{} + \frac{u\; R_{e}}{} + {\frac{sy}{}R_{1}C_{1}} + \frac{u\; R_{1}}{} +} \\ {{\frac{su}{}R_{e}R_{1}C_{1}} + {\frac{U_{O\; C\; V}^{\prime}\left( \hat{x_{1}} \right)u}{}\; \frac{R_{1}C_{1}}{C_{nom}}}} \end{pmatrix}}}$

wherein “L” is the gain of the reduced observer 164.

The reduced observer 164 thus converges to a residual set, i.e., a compact neighborhood of the desired values, for a bounded error estimate of SOH. The SOC estimate is fed into the SOH estimator 162 and modified parameters are generated by the estimator 162 and fed back to the reduced observer 164. Accordingly, the loop of FIG. 3 is closed.

In other embodiments, other observers are incorporated. By way of example, in one embodiment the SOC for the cell 102 is defined by the following equation in the reduced observer 164:

$\overset{.}{\hat{x_{1}}} = {{- \frac{u}{C_{nom}}} + {L\left( {\frac{y}{} - \frac{\hat{y}}{}} \right)}}$

wherein

“u” is the current applied to the battery,

“C_(nom)” is the nominal capacity of the cell,

“L” is the gain of the reduced observer 164

“y” is the measured cell voltage,

“

” represents a higher order filter with a cut-off frequency that depends upon the expected drive cycle (about 0.1 Hz in one embodiment), such as a 4^(th) order Butterworth filter with a cut-off frequency of 0.1 rad/s, and

“ŷ” is the estimate of the output voltage.

The model 160 was validated using a commercial 18650 Li-ion cell while estimating all parameters in real time. Actual values for U_(ocv) and nominal capacity C_(nom) were obtained using open cell voltage experiments prior to validation testing. During validation testing, three consecutive drive cycles were applied to the cell with intermediate rests. The results are shown in FIG. 4 which includes a chart 200 of the actual SOC of the cell versus time. The three drive cycles resulted in voltage drop regions 202, 204, and 206 resulting in an ending SOC of 20%. The cell voltages corresponding to 100% and 0% SOC were 4.1V and 2.8V, respectively.

In running the model 160, a noise of 20 mV was introduced into the voltage signal. A noise of C/50 A and an additional error in the form of an offset of C/10 A was introduced on the current signal. Additionally, the initial value for each of the kinetic parameters was established at between 2 and 10 times the actual value with an initial error of 20% for the SOC. The values for the kinetic parameters and the SOC generated by the model 160 during the validation testing are shown in FIG. 4 by charts 210, 212, 214, and 216.

Chart 210 depicts the estimated value generated by the parameter estimator 162 for the R_(e). The estimated R_(e) initially exhibits a large drop at 218 during the initial voltage drop region 202 primarily because of the introduced 20% error in the initial SOC estimate. The estimated R_(e) quickly stabilizes thereafter for the remainder of the voltage drop region 202. At the initialization of the voltage drop regions 204 and 206, smaller perturbations at 220 and 222 are exhibited because of changing current, temperature, and SOC values. The estimated value of R_(e) is otherwise stable in the voltage drop regions 204 and 206.

Chart 212 depicts the estimated value generated by the parameter estimator 162 for the resistor (R₁) 156. The estimated R₁ is initially zero at 224 as the estimated R_(e) drops at 218 because of the large initial SOC error. As the estimated R_(e) begins to increase during the initial voltage drop region 202, the estimated R₁ increases at 226 and then settles to a stable value for the remainder of the voltage drop region 202. At the initialization of the voltage drop regions 204 and 206, smaller perturbations at 228 and 230 are exhibited because of changing current, temperature, and SOC values. The estimated value of R₁ is otherwise stable in the voltage drop regions 204 and 206.

Chart 214 depicts the estimated value generated by the parameter estimator 162 for the capacitor (C₁) 158. The estimated C₁ initially exhibits a large perturbation at 232. As the other estimated parameters and SOC stabilize during the initial voltage drop region 202, the estimated C₁ stabilizes at 234 for the remainder of the voltage drop region 202. At the initialization of the voltage drop regions 204 and 206, smaller perturbations at 236 and 238 are exhibited because of changing current, temperature, and SOC values. The estimated value of C₁ is otherwise stable in the voltage drop regions 204 and 206.

Chart 216 depicts the estimated SOC value 240 generated by the reduced modified observer 164 along with the estimated SOC 242 based upon coulomb counting. The estimated SOH, initialized with a 20% error, rapidly converges to the SOC 242. The actual SOC error of the estimated SOC value 240 is depicted in chart 250. Chart 250 reveals the actual SOC error decreases to less than 2% (line 252). The variation in the SOC error during the rest periods of chart 200 result from changing temperature of the cell.

While the disclosure has been illustrated and described in detail in the drawings and foregoing description, the same should be considered as illustrative and not restrictive in character. It is understood that only the preferred embodiments have been presented and that all changes, modifications and further applications that come within the spirit of the disclosure are desired to be protected. 

1. An electrochemical battery system, comprising: at least one electrochemical cell; a first sensor configured to generate a current signal indicative of an amplitude of a current passing into or out of the at least one electrochemical cell; a second sensor configured to generate a voltage signal indicative of a voltage across the at least one electrochemical cell; a memory in which command instructions are stored; and a processor configured to execute the command instructions to obtain the current signal and the voltage signal, and to generate kinetic parameters for an equivalent circuit model of the at least one electrochemical cell by obtaining a derivative of an open cell voltage (U_(ocv)) with respect to a state of charge (SOC), obtaining an estimated nominal capacity (C_(nom)) of the at least one electrochemical cell, and estimating the kinetic parameters using a modified least-square algorithm with forgetting factor.
 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the equivalent circuit model comprises: an equivalent resistance (R_(e)); and a parallel circuit in series with the R_(e), the parallel circuit including a parallel circuit resistance (R₁) and a parallel circuit capacitance (C₁), with the kinetic parameters including R_(e), R₁, and C₁.
 3. The system of claim 2, wherein the equivalent circuit model in continuous time is written as: ${\begin{pmatrix} {\overset{.}{x}}_{1} \\ {\overset{.}{x}}_{2} \end{pmatrix} = {{\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & {{- 1}/\left( {R_{1}C_{1}} \right)} \end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix} x_{1} \\ x_{2} \end{pmatrix}} + {\begin{pmatrix} {{- 1}/C_{nom}} \\ {{1/R_{1}}C_{1}} \end{pmatrix}u}}},\mspace{14mu} {and}$ ${y = {{U_{O\; C\; V}\left( x_{1} \right)} + {\begin{pmatrix} 0 & {- R_{1}} \end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix} x_{1} \\ x_{2} \end{pmatrix}} + {\left( {- R_{e}} \right)u}}},$ wherein “u” is a current applied to the at least one electrochemical cell, “y” is a measured voltage across the at least one electrochemical cell, “x₁” is a SOC of the at least one electrochemical cell, and “x₂” is the current (i₁) through the R₁.
 4. The system of claim 2, wherein generating the kinetic parameters is based upon defining a parametric form “

” as: $ = {\frac{s^{2}y}{} + \frac{s\; \mathcal{L}\left\{ {{U_{O\; C\; V}^{\prime}\left( {\hat{x}}_{1} \right)}\frac{u}{C_{nom}}} \right\}}{}}$ wherein “

(•)” represents a Laplacé transform, “u” is a current applied to the at least one electrochemical cell, “y” is a measured voltage across the at least one electrochemical cell, “s” represents a complex number with real numbers σ and ω, “

” represents a higher order filter with a cut-off frequency that depends upon an expected drive cycle, and “{circumflex over (x)}₁” is an estimate of a SOC of the at least one electrochemical cell.
 5. The system of claim 4, wherein the higher order filter is a 4^(th) order Butterworth filter.
 6. The system of claim 4, wherein generating the kinetic parameters is further based upon defining a vector (Φ) as: $\Phi = {\begin{bmatrix} \Phi_{1} \\ \Phi_{2} \\ \Phi_{3} \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} \frac{su}{} \\ \frac{s^{2}u}{} \\ {\frac{sy}{} + \frac{s\; \mathcal{L}\left\{ {{U_{O\; C\; V}^{\prime}\left( {\hat{x}}_{1} \right)}\frac{u}{C_{nom}}} \right\}}{}} \end{bmatrix}}$
 7. The system of claim 6, wherein generating the kinetic parameters comprises converting the vector (Φ) into the following parametric form: z=Φ ^(T)Θ+

(U _(ocv)(x ₁(0)),t) wherein “Φ^(T)” is a transpose of the matrixΦ,

:

×

⁺→

is a class

function, $\Theta = {\begin{bmatrix} \Theta_{1} \\ \Theta_{2} \\ \Theta_{3} \end{bmatrix} \in {\mathbb{R}}^{3}}$ is a non-linear transformation of the physical parameters (R_(e), R₁, C₁)∈

³, and the inverse transform is defined as: $\begin{bmatrix} R_{e} \\ R_{1} \\ C_{1} \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} {- \Theta_{2}} \\ \frac{\Theta_{1} + {\Theta_{2}\Theta_{3}}}{\Theta_{3}} \\ \frac{1}{\Theta_{1} + {\Theta_{2}\Theta_{3}}} \end{bmatrix}$
 8. The system of claim 7, wherein generating the kinetic parameters comprises executing the following parameter law: {circumflex over ({dot over (Θ)}(t)=ε(t)P(t)Φ(t) ε(t)=z(t)−Φ^(T)(t){circumflex over (Θ)}(t) {dot over (P)}(t)=βP(t)−P(t)Φ(t)Φ(t)^(T) P(t) wherein “ε” is the output error, “P” is a covariance matrix, the matrix P∈

^(3×3) is initialized as a positive definitive matrix P_(o), and the initial kinetic parameters estimate {circumflex over (Θ)}(0)=Θ₀ is used as an initial value for the kinetic parameters (Θ).
 9. A method of determining kinetic parameters for an equivalent circuit model of at least one electrochemical cell, comprising: obtaining a derivative of an open cell voltage (U_(ocv)) with respect to a state of charge (SOC); obtaining an estimated nominal capacity (C_(nom)) of the at least one electrochemical cell; and estimating the kinetic parameters using a modified least-square algorithm with forgetting factor.
 10. The method of claim 9, wherein the equivalent circuit model comprises: an equivalent resistance (R_(e)); and a parallel circuit in series with the R_(e), the parallel circuit including a parallel circuit resistance (R₁) and a parallel circuit capacitance (C₁), with the kinetic parameters including R_(e), R₁, and C₁.
 11. The method of claim 10, wherein the equivalent circuit model in continuous time is written as: ${\begin{pmatrix} {\overset{.}{x}}_{1} \\ {\overset{.}{x}}_{2} \end{pmatrix} = {{\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & {{- 1}/\left( {R_{1}C_{1}} \right)} \end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix} x_{1} \\ x_{2} \end{pmatrix}} + {\begin{pmatrix} {{- 1}/C_{nom}} \\ {{1/R_{1}}C_{1}} \end{pmatrix}u}}},\mspace{14mu} {and}$ ${y = {{U_{O\; C\; V}\left( x_{1} \right)} + {\begin{pmatrix} 0 & {- R_{1}} \end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix} x_{1} \\ x_{2} \end{pmatrix}} + {\left( {- R_{e}} \right)u}}},$ wherein “u” is a current applied to the at least one electrochemical cell, “y” is a measured voltage across the at least one electrochemical cell, “x₁” is a SOC of the at least one electrochemical cell, and “x₂” is the current (i₁) through the R₁.
 12. The method of claim 10, wherein estimating the kinetic parameters comprises: defining a parametric form “

” as: $ = {\frac{s^{2}y}{} + \frac{s\; \mathcal{L}\left\{ {{U_{O\; C\; V}^{\prime}\left( {\hat{x}}_{1} \right)}\frac{u}{C_{nom}}} \right\}}{}}$ wherein “

(•)” represents a Laplacé transform, “u” is a current applied to the at least one electrochemical cell, “y” is a measured voltage across the at least one electrochemical cell, “s” represents a complex number with real numbers σ and ω, “

” represents a higher order filter with a cut-off frequency that depends upon an expected drive cycle, and “{circumflex over (x)}₁” is an estimate of a SOC of the at least one electrochemical cell.
 13. The method of claim 12, wherein the higher order filter is a 4^(th) order Butterworth filter.
 14. The method of claim 12, wherein estimating the kinetic parameters comprises: defining a vector (Φ) as: $\Phi = {\begin{bmatrix} \Phi_{1} \\ \Phi_{2} \\ \Phi_{3} \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} \frac{su}{} \\ \frac{s^{2}u}{} \\ {\frac{sy}{} + \frac{s\; \mathcal{L}\left\{ {{U_{O\; C\; V}^{\prime}\left( {\hat{x}}_{1} \right)}\frac{u}{C_{nom}}} \right\}}{}} \end{bmatrix}}$
 15. The method of claim 14, wherein estimating the kinetic parameters comprises: converting the vector (Φ) into the following parametric form: z=Φ ^(T)Θ+

(U _(OCV)(x ₁(0)),t) wherein “Φ^(T)” is a transpose of the matrixΦ,

:

×

⁺→

is a class

function, $\Theta = {\begin{bmatrix} \Theta_{1} \\ \Theta_{2} \\ \Theta_{3} \end{bmatrix} \in {\mathbb{R}}^{3}}$ is a non-linear transformation of the physical parameters (R_(e), R₁, C₁)∈

³, and the inverse transform is defined as: $\begin{bmatrix} R_{e} \\ R_{1} \\ C_{1} \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} {- \Theta_{2}} \\ \frac{\Theta_{1} + {\Theta_{2}\Theta_{3}}}{\Theta_{3}} \\ \frac{1}{\Theta_{1} + {\Theta_{2}\Theta_{3}}} \end{bmatrix}$
 16. The method of claim 15, wherein estimating the kinetic parameters comprises: executing the following parameter law: {circumflex over ({dot over (Θ)}(t)=ε(t)P(t)Φ(t) ε(t)=z(t)−Φ^(T)(t){circumflex over (Θ)}(t) {dot over (P)}(t)=βP(t)−P(t)Φ(t)Φ(t)^(T) P(t) wherein “ε” is the output error, “P” is a covariance matrix, the matrix P∈

^(3×3) is initialized as a positive definitive matrix P_(o), and the initial kinetic parameters estimate {circumflex over (Θ)}(0)=Θ₀ is used as an initial value for the kinetic parameters (Θ). 